Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (8) TMI 859 - AT - Income TaxReopening of assessment u/s 147 - reassessment triggered on the basis of audit objection - HELD THAT:- We find that the regular assessment was framed u/s 143(3) and the case was reopened within 4 years. There is nothing on record which would show that any such verification of examination was carried out by Ld. AO during regular assessment proceedings. The proceedings were triggered on the basis of Audit Objection which certainly constitutes ‘information’. As long as there is independent application of mind by Ld. AO to arrive at conclusion that there was escapement of income, this information could certainly be utilized to arrive at this formation of belief. The case laws as cited by the Ld. CIT(A) duly support the validity of reassessment proceedings. We are in complete agreement with the adjudication of Ld. CIT(A), in this regard, in the impugned order. Ground Nos. 1 to 5 stands dismissed. Deduction u/s 54 - legal impact of unregistered Joint Development Agreement - whether the assessee could be granted deduction u/s 54 merely on the basis of unregistered Agreement to Sale couple with possession which never fructified into registered Sale Deed till date? - HELD THAT:- The provisions of Sec.54 enable the assessee to claim deduction of Long-Term Capital gains provided the assessee, within specified period, purchases or construct a residential house. The term purchase, in our considered opinion, has to be absolute purchase since the object of the beneficial provision is to encourage investment in housing. An agreement to sale, till it translates into conveyance of full ownership rights, by way of registered documents, is merely an agreement and do not result into transfer of ownership absolute. It only given partial rights out of bundle of rights to the parties intending to purchase the property. However, till actual conveyance happens, it could not be said that the assessee has purchased the houses property. Another fact to be noted is that the agreement has never fructified into registered sale deed till date despite the fact that the assessee has paid full consideration of Rs.165 Lacs and the document was executed on 30-03-2012. No valid circumstances which have impeded the registration of final deed have been adduced by the assessee. This agreement is unregistered one and therefore, the adjudication of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Balbir Singh Maini [2017 (10) TMI 323 - SUPREME COURT] would apply wherein it was held that fulfilment of Sec.53A of Transfer of Property Act itself was not enough to consider a transfer within the meaning of Sec. 2(47) - Also after the commencement of amendment act, 2001, an unregistered agreement would have no effect in law for the purposes of Sec.53A - there is would be no agreement in the eyes of law which could be enforced u/s 53A of the Transfer of Property Act. In order to qualify as a transfer u/s 2(47)(v), there must be contract which could be enforced in law u/s 53A of Transfer of Property Act. A reading of Section 17(1A) and Sec.49 of the Registration Act shows that in the eyes of law, there is not contract which could be taken cognizance of for the propose specified in Sec.53A. Therefore, the unregistered document as entered into by the assessee could not be considered as fulfilment of requirement of Sec.54. Therefore, the adjudication of lower authorities on merits could not be faulted with.
|